Wrandom Writings

Friday, December 13, 2013

Storytelling
What is storytelling?
Traditional methods
Non-traditional methods
Stories in the past and present
NOTES:Storytelling is one of those interesting things that can be defined in many ways. Because of this, it is easy to warp the definition to one that supports our own needs. I found one that made the most sense to me off of Wikipedia. “Storytelling is the conveying of events in words, and images, often by improvisation or embellishment.” In addition to the more traditional way of telling stories (orally), we have produced written stories and more recently film as a method to tell stories. The latter is the one I will focus my presentation on.
Stories were once used to teach specific lessons, explain the unexplainable, and to frighten others (mostly children) into behaving. Now stories are used much more to entertain and engage the mind, in business interactions, as well as to stir up our memories and bring people together.
Stories are known to change and evolve. I believe they will continue to do so as long as people continue telling them. They will also change because of the information and advancements in technology that come about. Movies have evolved to become more realistic because of the advances in technology and medicine such as the breakthrough in the DNA genetic code and what it means. One example is the X-men movies.
In the X-men movies, certain genes in otherwise normal humans have mutated to give them specific powers and abilities. This shows significance advancements from the earlier science fiction films such as the 1910 version of “Frankenstein” which has the use of alchemy rather of the modernly accepted scientific studies.
(Kirby) and Wikipedia

What does this have to do with science?
Reciprocal affects on each other
Effects of Science Fiction films on interest in science
Public understanding increases
NOTES: Not only has biology impacted the film industry and other stories, but the film industry has had significant effects on biology and technology as well. Advancements have come in many ways and at different times. Some older films, like “Star Trek: Next Generation” had provided inventors with an idea on how to produce the next technology.
One teacher decided to test if films affected the amount of interest generated for science classes. In this course, they watched and critiqued science fiction films such as “Gattaca”, “Jurassic Park”, “The Day After Tomorrow”, and “Armageddon”. The students were tasked to discover the scientific accuracy of the movies they watched. Overall, students showed an increase in interest in science after watching several of these films which covered topics such as biotechnology, natural disasters, and making babies (genetically engineering them).
When films use technology, it allows for the general public to understand more fully what is possible in the scientific world. DNA and cloning are just a couple of the biological possibilities that have opened up to the public opinion because of films. Although the films are more advanced in how they portray the science, it does allow for many basic ideas to be uncovered.
(Laprise) and (Rose) and (Safran)

Genetics in Story
Eugenics
“Gattaca”
“Jekyll and Hyde”
Daedalus and the Minotaur
NOTES: Eugenics is the science of using controlled breeding to create a species of humans with more desirable characteristics while weeding out the less desirable ones. One infamous example of this was Hitler’s belief in a perfect race (blonde hair, blue eyes, etc).
“Gattaca” was an interesting movie that focused on the separation of the elite (those with good genetics) and those that could only get menial jobs because they were the “god” children (their parents did not choose the genes for the child). While this may be considered an extreme example of prejudice and discrimination, it is used to show the inferior vs genetic elite yet leaves the consumer to decide which was the true monster.
“Jekyll and Hyde” is yet another story that is filled with genetic superiority. While Dr. Jekyll is considered a genius, Mr. Hyde, his counterpart is outwardly a monster as well as inwardly. He represents the evil nature inside each of us, and what would happen if we were to let it out.
Going back even more, we have the Greek myth of the inventor Daedalus and his minotaur inside the labyrinth. Daedalus is an interesting character from the myths. He was an inventor with little respect to the gods or others. Essentially, he did what he wanted to. His minotaur was a genetic experiment of breeding a woman with a bull. It was successful and he locked this creation inside his complex labyrinth which was built for King Minos of Crete.
(Jeffreys) and (Haldane) and (Kirby)

Film's Impact on Science Fiction
Science Fiction!
1950’s
Disney
Cloning
NOTES: Science Fiction has had an incredible impact on the knowledge that we have of science. There are several films that have impacted the knowledge advancements in said field. In 1954, Walt Disney took on a film project far beyond its time with its production of “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea”. It was the first film to use special underwater filming for several scenes. Disney then ran a special on the making of the movie that aired for several months and was in high demand because it showed several technology
Unfortunately, along with the advances that come from film, we also have some public misconceptions. Cloning is something that is continually wrongfully displayed in film. Instead of striving for historical accuracy, they just make it for a good story.
(Huebner, Eberl, and Telotte)
Conclusion-ish
Where would we be without storytelling and English? Without modern medicine, science, and technology?
Science is all around us, as is storytelling, it only makes sense that they would bounce off of, improve, modify, and test one another’s boundaries.
NOTES: “the impact of modern medicine in Western Europe “has had almost, if not quite, as deep an effect… as the industrial revolution.””- Haldane/Jeffreys

Without storytelling, humans could not have evolved even half as far. There would be no understanding between each other and no way to convey the lessons we learned to others. English covers many aspects of literature including being used in the production of films. However, without modern medicine, science, and technology our species would still be in a primitive age with lower life expectancy and a high infant mortality rate. Many of us would not even have lasted this long.
(Jeffreys)

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

I went for a very basic outline and posting for my slides, but I have lots of information covered in my notes. I hope this works! I'm not sure what happened to my brain. I have had this presentation done for a few days, but forgot entirely that we needed to post to our blogs about it until I logged onto canvas today...

What is storytelling?
Traditional methods
Non-traditional methods
Stories in the past and present
English

What does this have to do with science?
Reciprocal affects on each other
Effects of Science Fiction films on interest is science
Public understanding increases

Genetics in Story
Eugenics
“Gattaca”
“Jekyll and Hyde”
Daedalus and the Minotaur

Sunday, November 10, 2013

"The future will see an intensification, even a perfection, of what draws us to fiction in the first place."-Johnathan Gottschall.
When Gottschall says this in his book, he is talking about the evolution of story and just finishing up an interesting section on "reality" tv shows. I think that this statement sums up a large portion of his entire book (and his argument). There are certain things that draw us to fiction: characters, their predicaments, and the characters being freed from their problems. These things are easy to point out in the various forms of storytelling and Gottschall is using it to paint us a picture of how the future will look for storytelling. The various advances in technology are allowing stories to change and evolve based on decisions made by the readers/characters of the story. It is an intriguing point of view and I am inclined to agree with him that storytelling will never fade. In fact, I am one to believe that even the novel won't fade from view entirely. With the new Kindles, Nooks, and other e-readers out there, the novel is more easily accessible than ever and will continue to thrive within society. Storytelling itself will continue to evolve in some ways but the spoken story will remain forever a large part of storytelling so long as humans are just that; human.
I did find one source that disagrees with Gottschall and shows the "death of the novel" rather than how story will continue forever. I read through it and was forced to laugh because of how far off I believe it to be. I have already told my thoughts how how story will evolve including the change in the 'novel' itself.
Scott Branson. "Gide, Wilde, and the Death of the Novel." MLN 127.5 (2012): 1226-1248. Project MUSE. Web. 09 Nov. 2013. .

My own research this week was a review/ in depth reading of the sources I have currently and eliminating ones that are too repetitive or aren't focused enough on my topic of choice (how biology has affected the film aspect of storytelling), but I am keeping my other topic on the backburner just in case this one falls through. The sources I have found for this first topic have been listed on previous blog postings, so if you're really curious, feel free to go back through them!

Sunday, November 3, 2013

It is my belief that, after doing the assigned reading, it is impossible to write a 100% truthful memoir or autobiography. It is interesting how each person can remember the same occasion in entirely different ways and with strikingly changed details. Memory is something that can't be trusted by itself. Even interviewing others to make a memoir or autobiography "more accurate" doesn't work because their memory of events and conversations can 't be trusted any more than yours can. The only way you can trust the facts is if it has been officially documented. Our own stories whether written or spoken should be taken with a grain of salt because our memories skew the truth. No memoirs are considered completely truthful.
I am inclined to believe that this claim about our memories not being truthful was completely supported by his later claim. We do make up stories and change our belief about the truth we remember. It changes with how our perceptions bend the truth or how other people tell us it happens. When people relate their own truths to us, it can change how we remember certain events ourselves. It is yet more evidence and examples that our memories cannot be relied on for the 100% honest-to-goodness truth.

Jeffreys, Mark. "Dr. Daedalus And His Minotaur: Mythic Warnings About Genetic Engineering From J.B.S. Haldane, François Jacob, And Andrew Niccol's Gattaca." Journal Of Medical Humanities 22.2 (2001): 137-152. Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection. Web. 3 Nov. 2013. This source is one that demonstrates the connection between the film industry and our understanding of biology (more specifically for this case, genetics and bioethics). It is an intriguing article that also pulls quite a bit from the stories of old myths (from Greece).
Safran, Stephen P. "Movie images of disability and war: Framing history and political ideology." Remedial and Special Education. 22.4 (2001): 223. Web. 1 Nov. 2013. This article talks about genetics (disabilities) as the human weakness and how there are many instances when people believed that people with disabilities should be "taken out of the gene pool". It also uses several Hollywood films to back up this claim.

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Film and Biology:
The affects of biology on the film industry is probably the topic that interests me the most, however it is extremely difficult to find articles that are relevent to it.

Public understanding of science based on movies:
"While popular culture is generally acknowledged to have some impact on public opinion of science, attempts to evaluate this relationship have focused largely on how the public perceives science, rather than how well they understand it". This teacher uses biology based movies for discussing the more interesting aspects of science such as cloning, artificial intelligence, and recombining animals.
Rose, Christopher. "How to Teach Biology Using the Movie Science of Cloning People, Resurrecting the Dead, and Combining Flies and Humans." Public Understanding of Science. 12.3 (2003): 289-296. Web. 27 Oct. 2013.

Effects of eugenics on the fiction film industry:
It goes through the different eras over the last 100 years and describes how the history of eugenics has affected a specific genre of movies (as film is a type of storytelling).
Kirby, David A. "The Devil in Our DNA: A Brief History of Eugenics in Science Fiction Films." Literature and Medicine. 26.1 (2007): 83-108. Web. 4 Oct. 2013.

Impact of films on student’s interest in science:
This article I found discuses how research was conducted in classes in a university. The students had to watch science fiction films in nonmajor related courses and they had to write a response discussing how realistic the films were to science. At the end of the course, a survey was taken to see how much interest the students had in science after the course.
Laprise, Shari, and Chuck Winrich. "The Impact of Science Fiction Films on Student Interest in Science."Journal of College Science Teaching. 40.2 (2010): 45-49. Web. 27 Oct. 2013.

Written Literature and Ancient Medicine:
This topic isn't quite as interesting as the previous one, but I still find it intriguing. There are several angles I could take with this research and it is intriguing to study ancient civilizations through their literature in regards to medicine.

Indians perception of wind in the body:
Early Sanskrit literature about the ancient five bodily winds. It goes on to determine the similarities to wind in the atmosphere and wind in the body. It focuses on the ancient Indian's views of bodily wind.
Zysk, Kenneth G. "The Bodily Winds in Ancient India Revisited." Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 13. (2007): 105-115. Web. 27 Oct. 2013.

Using documents of ancient civilizations to understand disease and health:
The lectures share a concern for books, reading, and the life of the mind in the premodern age. It discusses treatments in early Western methods. Not my favorite source...
Stock, Brian. "New Literary History." Johns Hopkins University Press. 37.3 (2006): 489-501. Web. 27 Oct. 2013.

Ancient Greek literature affecting perceptions of female gynecology:
This article goes in depth about how the literature of ancient Greece allows a glimpse into the several problems/experiences of women with gynecological medicine and mythical constructions.
Bachvarova, Mary R. "Io and the Gorgon: Ancient Greek Medical and Mythical Constructions of the Interaction Between Women’s Experiences of Sex and Birth." Project Muse. 46.3 (2013): n. page. Web. 27 Oct. 2013.

Treatment for diseases- Islamic Dr in the Middle Ages:
It is about some papers written during the Middle Ages by an Islamic man about treating sicknesses of the poor. It was of a genre that was popular during this time period called "medicine for the poor".
Bos, Gerrit. "Ibn Al-Jazzār on Medicine for the Poor and Destitute." Journal of the American Oriental Society. 118.3 (1998): 365-375. Web. 5 Oct. 2013.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

"Among the books burned that night in 1933 was the play Almansor (1821) by the German Jewish writer Heinrich Heine. The play contains this famous and prophetic line: “Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people.”"- I absolutely loved this quote. It helped put the whole chapter into perspective for me. It really helps cement the point that Gottschall was making with the effects characters have on people. Surprisingly, this is the first chapter when I have agreed with Jon Gottschall almost entirely. His use of examples when describing how books change peoples personalities, while extreme, were very persuasive. Gottschall's examples included the ever argumentative and speculative questions surrounding Adolf Hitler.
It is hard sometimes for us to think of Hitler of being human and the way that Gottschall described him was done to make it the story of a complicated life of a teenager with a passion. This is not much different than many other books (fictional and otherwise) that are used to suck in the reader. Our personality changes little by little with each story that we encounter. One such example of this is how J.K. Rowling changed the world through her enticing Harry Potter series. How many people's lives were changed as they anticipated the next book/movie to be released?
How much money did the average human spend trying to buy the latest "Bertie Botts Every Flavor Bean" package, the next book "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" with notes by Harry, Ron, and Hermoine (fictional characters!), or even the latest Harry Potter games? These characters that J.K. Rowling painted with words into our head have changed how people view others. They have changed the personalities of several young readers and brought new terms to conversations that would never have been otherwise.
On the other side of the spectrum, it is hard not to think that people have been changed by the comic books recently made into several popular movies ("Captain America", "Thor", "Iron Man", and the one that brought these heroes together, "The Avengers"). How many children have changed their games of make believe based on these movies being released? While these movies are very obviously make believe, there are parts of the brain that overlook this simple fact to exclaim the incredibleness and possibility of these movies.
There are hundreds of books, movies, or stories released that have had the ability to change the one consuming it. These stories have changed our own personalities, our interests, how we talk, or even some (such as Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451", which I disliked to a certain degree) have changed how we think and our ideas about right and wrong. Stories and especially the characters within, are able to change us in many subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) ways.

I will be the first to admit, my research took a definite hit this week due to the number of tests I had. I anticipate being able to pick up the slack now that my midterms and other exams are done for the time being. This research is going to take a much higher priority this week.

Sunday, October 13, 2013

“Writers are often lonely obsessives, especially the literary ones. It’s nice to be told what we write is of social value."-Louise Erdrich (Belluck A1).
"Story is the counterforce to social disorder, the tendency of things to fall apart" (Gottschall 1634-1635).
I like these two quotes a lot mainly because they discuss the importance of story in society. I just thought I would share them because I enjoyed them so much. My two emphasis areas are biology and English.
Now onto the real post:
I began my research project soon after reading chapter 7 in Jonathan Gottschall's book "The Storytelling Animal" and an intriguing article in The New York Times, "For Better Social Skills, Scientists Recommend a Little Chekhov" by Pam Belluck. This article inspired me to question, what biological responses are triggered in the human brain in response to stories. Whether reading, listening, or watching, is the human response something that is the same in all or different depending on the person? When I performed the research before the actual test, I found an intriguing article about how humans exhibited biological responses to the characters in stories and their actions (Deen, McCarthy 1607-1615). I thought this could have been taken a bit farther and used to determine if humans have an empathetic response to the characters in their stories. I have set up several groups of people (of varying ages), chosen an excerpt of a book to read that will elicit an emotional response, and determine if it is similar to others reading the same excerpt. All that is left is to perform the actual experiment and determine what my data results in. I believe that this will work and that many will show to exhibit the same empathetic response to the character in the story and that it will exhibit itself in biological symptoms that can be mapped.
While this isn't an acutal research project that I have done, I would fine it as one intriguing to perform if given the ample time and resources. Does anyone else think it would have the same results? Does anyone think that the results will be different?
Belluck, Pam. "For Better Social Skills, Scientists Recommend a Little Chekhov." New York Times. 03 OCT 2013: A1. Web. 13 Oct. 2013.
Deen, Ben; McCarthy, Gregory; Reading about the actions of others: Biological motion imagery and action congruency influence brain activity, Neuropsychologia, Volume 48, Issue 6, May 2010, Pages 1607-1615, ISSN 0028-3932, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.01.028.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002839321000045X)
Gottschall, Jonathan (2012-04-10). The Storytelling Animal: How Stories Make Us Human (Kindle Locations 1634-1635). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Kindle Edition.